Division of Forestry Strategic Direction
Statewide Forest Strategy 2010
Statewide Forest Assessment 2010
Forest Sustainability Framework
Statewide Forest Plan 2004
C7. Issue: Conflicting use of forests is a public debate.
Comment #: 1
Forest manage should be the primary concern. We do not manage corn fields for the secondary uss.
Comment #: 2
Ban all off road vehicles.
Comment #: 3
Timber management should take priority.
Comment #: 4
We can have it all as long as nobody gets too greedy. Some people are against everything, maybe they graduated from the school of Disney. What works in forests located in western states may not be right for Wisconsin Forests. This concept is true within our state also. A practice viewed as sound management in one area may be detrimental in another.
Comment #: 5
Lets not allow the few publicity seeking nut cases to influence the professional foresters and wildlife managers!
Comment #: 6
We must continue to manage our forests by correct management. If we don't manage our forests we won't have any down the road.
Comment #: 7
Forests are forests - not racetracks or playgrounds for industrial recreation.
Comment #: 8
I question whether this could be adequately addressed.
Comment #: 9
Unfortunately loggers have a bigger voice because there are more of them, the big companies have more clout/money and their interest is purely self-serving. Those of us altriustic members of society have a smaller, albeit more humanitarian opinon and are often not listened to.
Comment #: 10
As above, perhaps the focus should shift to good forestry practices and away from political expediency.
Comment #: 11
Same as above.
Comment #: 12
Naturally
Comment #: 13
Here again, public education is necessary
Comment #: 14
State could do an assessment and provide communities with the information; each community could still handle this for themselves.
Comment #: 15
Why is the word "science" absent in this paragraph?
Comment #: 16
Needs to be addressed through continued education efforts & funding of organizations like WFREA.
Comment #: 17
Need system/protocl for public input and conlict resolution.
Comment #: 18
It should be the owners and governments decision. If you don't own forested land keep your nose out.
Comment #: 19
A forum for expressing discontent and bringing up conflicts and potential solutions is most effective if there is evidence that a sincere effort is being made to address those concerns. Recent years has shown an increasing tendancy for authorities to listen. This is a good thing.
Comment #: 20
Some forest users, particularly vocal about aesthetic beauty, are actually very ignorant when it comes to managing for the long-term health of the forest. Management decisions should not be based on who shouts the loudest.
Comment #: 21
See C6
Comment #: 22
WATER QUALITY is essential to life! FOREST PRODUCTS are essential to living! WILDLIFE HABITAT preservation is essential to all of humanity! Perhaps we need to re-think this "right" to recreate in our forest lands!
Comment #: 23
Nutty ideas should not be allowed to manage forets
Comment #: 24
. . .when two opposing points of view confront one another, the "common good" resolved!
Comment #: 25
People who are not familiar with the forests should not have a part in this debate. I.e. environmentalist extremeists who have never walked in a forest and have no understanding of nature.
Comment #: 26
Elected governement officials represent some of the public's concerns about the environment, but more venues for imput are needed ie A Public Intervenor
Comment #: 27
? What you are asking
Comment #: 28
Again - develop alternative materials for industrial use throw all the perrioneg(?) and minig industries out of the state
Comment #: 29
Foresters know best!!
Comment #: 30
Trust the professional opinions of the local control.
Comment #: 31
A well managed forest for forest products can achieve all of these qualities. Forest management may impact any one of these qualities but only for a short time. This needs to be taught.
Comment #: 32
What about food, fuel, and shelter?
Comment #: 33
Managed forest lands tax law is an example of state/owner conflicts.
Comment #: 34
The controversies obviously will have to be (should be) considered and will (should) influence policy, but whether it needs "addressing", I'm not sure, unless the term referes to the preceding.
Comment #: 35
I know that educating the public is impossible, but the informatin has to be put out there.
Comment #: 36
Amen, but except for hunting and ginsing (?), most forests are vacant! Some agree comparisons needed before problems arise.
Comment #: 37
Public participation is essential
Comment #: 38
and always will be
Comment #: 39
See comment under B4.
Comment #: 40
A private/public (society) balance must be achieved - city ,township, county public policy must be achieved.
Comment #: 41
I think environmentalists go overboard an costs the landowner who properly manages his woodland uneeded extra exspence
Comment #: 42
Only on public land
Comment #: 43
But lets manage our forests first as forests and let the other activities by secondary
Comment #: 44
This is sad. All the avlues mentioned are usually direct results of forst management. People are narrow minded and only want what they see now and meets there particular needs.
Comment #: 45
Forests need to be managed for timber production 1st.
Comment #: 46
ATV's jet skis - big HP boats and snowmobiles and there abuse of H20 quality and soild erosion should be addressed
Comment #: 47
Pioritize!Water quality, soil concerns, wildlife>forest products>rec. Do not allow user groups such as snowmobilers and ATVers dictate forest policy
Comment #: 48
Get out of your vehicle, get off of your vehicle and WALK!!!
Comment #: 49
Goes back to the information available to regular people. Emotions are involved. Urban vs. rural upbringings and values. Everyone uses forest products. Educate!
Comment #: 50
See C6 notes.
Comment #: 51
We should always keep in mind the "greater picture".
Comment #: 52
Proven, forest silvicultural practice will return/supply in one way or another all for uses listed above.
Comment #: 53
Again, a solid long term plan and lots of education are key.
Comment #: 54
And the beat goes on . . . . . Think of it as "a war without end" -
Comment #: 55
The health of the forst should be priority.
Comment #: 56
DNR can manage that process to keep confrontation to a minimum; cooperation to a maximum.
Comment #: 57
My comment here is the same as C6.
Comment #: 58
This type of debate is healthy and informative. There is no bad publicity.
Comment #: 59
All users should have equal use of our forest not special interest groups.
Comment #: 60
As a city forester (arborist), I do not let the public tell me that their tree is unsafe because as a professional, I know better.
Comment #: 61
Good luck!!
Comment #: 62
The "enviro" groups have used this topic to solicit funds and foster disputes. It is not a "public" debate, but a small group who wants publicity.
Comment #: 63
Education.
Comment #: 64
Just because a group is more vocal does not make their cause more just.
Comment #: 65
I agree, but don't wish to see State, County forests mined down like U.S. Forests. Focus on keeping the forests in-tact, working, producing, economically sustaining.
Comment #: 66
It is better that professional leadership is more important. Once the priority of the State's resource (timber) management is identified, it should be managed by forest professionals to limit public compromise.
Comment #: 67
Comment is ok - but not management - let the public know consequences.
Comment #: 68
Work hard on this one. High on priority list!
Comment #: 69
MFP has good track record - follow that.
Comment #: 70
The value of forests as renewable crops meant to be harvested should be the first consideration.
Comment #: 71
The owner in most cases should have say in his own land, not the government.
Comment #: 72
I do understand that mature aspen stands need to be "clear cut" for proper regeneration. Many people see it as "butchering" a woods. Looks ugly, but I guess it's the way to do it.
Comment #: 73
Your list above is compatible most of the time.
Comment #: 74
However, open minded people will find a way to work around any problems.
Comment #: 75
Hopefully.
Comment #: 76
Leave the forests alone.
Comment #: 77
5
Comment #: 78
No logging on public lands and no clear cutting on any land. Use the most sustainable methods possible.
Comment #: 79
Need balances ? There is room for all of us
Comment #: 80
If it's private land that's another story, but as I stated in C6, management of the public forests should be utilized for all use's, and managed by the pros and not to be debated by environmentalists or anyone else!
Comment #: 81
Land owners will decide the best use
Comment #: 82
Forest products are #1; recreation should be a distant 2nd.
Comment #: 83
forest management should still primarily fall
Comment #: 84
See C6 above
Comment #: 85
So how would you address the issue?
Comment #: 86
Most people are not willing to take the time to get involved.d
Comment #: 87
So
Comment #: 88
Education is more important than public debate by uninformed people
Comment #: 89
It (the conflicting use/debate) is a product of the conflict industry which pays better than the constructive citizenship industry
Comment #: 90
Promote forest management techniques and wildlife habitat as a priority.
Comment #: 91
Debate is good when it leads to greater understanding by theose involved and when it leads to a solution. Forest issues don't have to be all solved immediately. It takes many years for trees to grow.
Comment #: 92
Education is needed more than more laws.
Comment #: 93
A priority should be the continue preservation of wildlife habitat for WILDERNESS type of hunting and fishing activites. A well planned logging effort is CERTANLY consistent wit hthis goal. Development, habitat fragmentation and motorized vehicle invasion of forest is NOT consistent with good forest mangement as this would represent forest destruction which if continue would eventually render the term "Forest" obsolete.
Comment #: 94
Debat is good foster "reasonableness"
Comment #: 95
See comment above - the voices crying in the wilderness of Norther Wisconsin are too often ignored - you listen but don't follow their advice and view points.
Comment #: 96
This is the very pledge that a "Tree Farmer" makes when they join the American Tree Farmer System. We grow the tree for eventual harvest.
Comment #: 97
We have too many "tree huggers(?)" who have not a clue to what makes a ?
Comment #: 98
Again - proper education of the value of working together should help.
Comment #: 99
Again, recognize viewpoints, but do not let impact plan - keep plan a "living plan" that is fluid as viewpoint and research turn out.
Comment #: 100
We need a balance of common sense to prevail.
Comment #: 101
All items are available with management of timber such as those listed in A11. These stands have been actively harvested and managed and still maintain the other uses.
Comment #: 102
You have to manage to benefit the majority or greatest number of citizens while providing minority interests and benefits where possible.
Comment #: 103
limit motorized trails
Comment #: 104
should be addressed but in a separate plan, NOT in the forest plan
Comment #: 105
At the national level, there are policy decisions being made from shear ignorance. We are not to this level in our state....yet.
Comment #: 106
Hunting sportsmen and women are the biggest contributors of dollars. Don't let non-payers decide.
Comment #: 107
People are selfish nowdays and aren't alwasy well informed of why certain management techniques are required
Comment #: 108
The squeeky wheel gets the grease - again, very scary unless we take our jobs seriously and do what we are supposed to do - manage the resource.
Comment #: 109
Even though there many different forest users we should not allow those people that are against harvesting to dictate what we harvest. I believe a few parcels should be set aside and allowed to grow naturally without human influence but the majority of our forests should be worked sustainably following sound forestry guidlines.
Comment #: 110
Information and success stories about how a forest can be managed need to be told.
Comment #: 111
As always, education is critical. People need to understand where their paper and wood products come from. They need to understand the opportunity to manage for the desired benefits, and that it is simply wrong to close up our forests, and to get our forest productsa from some coutry that does not choose to use good forest management.
Comment #: 112
This conflict will continue, but the plan can address how it will involve all the parties in the debate and the process it will use to decide what uses can co-occur and where and what is most appropriately done where.
Comment #: 113
A plan for the many benefits of sustainable foresty needs to be emphasized here.
Comment #: 114
Urban residents need to be educated on what constitutes good forest management practices.
Comment #: 115
Again, this illustrates the need to get all stakeholders to the table.
Comment #: 116
This is an umbrella for several issues and trends, but is not an issue by itself.
Comment #: 117
C4 and B3 and emotion plus medis win the battles along with supervisors that are generalist and don't support their staff.
Comment #: 118
We need to maintain the tranquility of our wilderness and not ruin it with ATV's and such. It no longer is a wilderness if you have motorized vehicles cruising through it. It tears up the land and disturbs the creatures that LIVE there. That is there home! We need to respect it and work with them.
Comment #: 119
more education is needed before more meaningful debate can be undertaken
Comment #: 120
keep motor vehicles out of public lands
Comment #: 121
Public access for hunting and other recreation needs to be maintained.
Comment #: 122
I would add in addition to inform management decisions, inluence as well.
Comment #: 123
maybe everyone should try getting along
Comment #: 124
I think a long-term vision for WI forests would help in this debate.
Comment #: 125
a balance must be met in terms of multiple users, you will never please everyone, but pleasing the majority is important
Comment #: 126
THIS IS ONE SIDE VIEW THAT THE FOREST CANNOT BE MANAGED FOR EVERYONE.THIS VIEW MUST STOP.
Comment #: 127
The question arises again...are we managing for profit or sustainability...take a stand, and make your decision. Biodiversity and integrated resource management cannot be attained if short-sighted profit is the primary goal.
Comment #: 128
Should try to please as many of the users as possible. However uses should be prioritized to determine which ones are more crucial to maintain, with no real consideration to public opinion.
Comment #: 129
We should welcome this debate if we believe in democracy. Citizens are becoming very sophisticated and want to learn more and be better heard.
Comment #: 130
Forests can be managed to provide aesthetic beauty as well as forest products and maintaining water quality. We must first address the issue of wood product usage.
Comment #: 131
Forests can be managed to provide aesthetic beauty as well as forest products and maintaining water quality. We must first address the issue of wood product usage.
Comment #: 132
I support places for wildlife and less motorized use of forests (less ATVs...)
Comment #: 133
I think the public is becoming increasingly more involved than ever and they need to know what has to be done and how to go about it.
Comment #: 134
See B-4
Comment #: 135
See C6 response
Comment #: 136
All uses need to have a value placed on them. The loudest voice is not always the best option.
Comment #: 137
Consider what one needs to survive, and that should be the ultimate basis, not aesthetics and preferences, unless everybody is getting an equal share of the necessities (e. g. clean water, abundant game for food, etc.).
Comment #: 138
And this changes over time too.
Comment #: 139
This is important but it would come after an intial plan is developed.
Comment #: 140
Logging is the way in which we pay for having public lands for people to use. Proper timber management and recreation will have to become compatible if we are to maintain public lands for societies various needs.
Comment #: 141
Of course some of the management techniques will be controversial. We learn new and better ways to manage our forest all of the times.
Comment #: 142
Ditto above!
Comment #: 143
Emphasize that County land & water conservation
departments have the most up-to-date information.
Comment #: 144
The reasoning of professionals (degrees in forestry and biological sciences)in the long-term mamagement of our public lands should be given much more weight in decision making than the single voices of industry, environmentalists, recreationists, or private land owners, alone.
Comment #: 145
The reasoning of professionals (degrees in forestry and biological sciences)in the long-term mamagement of our public lands should be given much more weight in decision making than the single voices of industry, environmentalists, recreationists, or private land owners, alone.
Comment #: 146
The reasoning of professionals (degrees in forestry and biological sciences)in the long-term mamagement of our public lands should be given much more weight in decision making than the single voices of industry, environmentalists, recreationists, or private land owners, alone.
Comment #: 147
It will continue. You need to recognize it. I doubt that you can make it go away, and I don't think you want to increase it.
Comment #: 148
These conflicts will likely grow and worsen in the months ahead. The DNR will need to make some tough decisions. I hope you always err on the side of science over politics, and the public interest over corporate welfare.
Comment #: 149
You have no choice here, even if you think you do.
Comment #: 150
I disagree with that because most of the public will be more concerned for enjoying the forsest for recreational activities (like snowmobiling) so the forest will be declining in size and sooner or later the forsest of wis will be scarse. maybe not now but in furture generations.
Comment #: 151
See my comments under B4.
Comment #: 152
We need to limit human impact, especially the devistation caused by ATVs. We need a plan to give ATVs and future rec vehicles a space without disturbing the forests.
Comment #: 153
We need to limit human impact, especially the devistation caused by ATVs.
Comment #: 154
Seems like this is just a statement of fact that needs no addressing in a plan.
Comment #: 155
Continued public debate and comment are the most effective methods of providing community input opportunities and discovering the most important social issues for that community.
Comment #: 156
ditto c6
Comment #: 157
Moderation between rival groups should follow rules or guidlines. The volume of one's voice should not be a measure of their issue, devotion, or merrit. Guidelines for extracting fact from rhetoric should be part of the plan.
Comment #: 158
state should develop mandatory guidelines to protect riparian areas
Last Revised: Monday July 30 2007
RSS